Thursday, September 24, 2009

Weapon vs. AC: Once More, With Feeling

This is, I think, post No. 3 on the subject, picking up on my last thoughts of some while ago. And I think I may have gotten somewhere. At least far enough to play-test it. This Chart is, again, for Spellcraft & Swordplay; it could be used with other iterations of Ye Auld Game but the number woudl have to massaged to move from a 2d6 dice mechanic to 1d20.

The basic idea here is I have lumped all weapons into a Weapon Class, such as Sword, Axe, Mace/Hammer, and so forth. All members of that Weapon Class have the same base number to hit the various Armour Classes (see? Weapon Class vs. Armour Class. Groovy symmetry). This is the idea that got me through the block of trying to distinguish a dagger from a short sword from a long sword from a claymore.

Here's the Matrix:

Armour Classes in this system are also reduced to five Classes:

All weapon also have a Weapon Size: Small, Medium, or Large. Medium weapons are the baseline and the size is meant to be taken liberally: a Roman gladius is a medium sword as much as a medieval braodsword.

Small weapons roll 2D for damage, with the lower result used. In addition, a small weapon can be used in the off-hand to parry. This grants a -1 Defense to incoming melee attacks, but no Defense to missile attacks. However, anytime such a character scores a critical hit (12+), he automatically gets a second hit in with the other weapon rolling 2D damage for damage, with the higher result used.

Large weapons roll 2D damage for damage, with the higher result used. They are unwieldy and impose a -1 to the Combat Roll. A character using a Large weapon cannot also use a shield.

And that's it. I like the look of it right now. Oh, I could keep fiddling with it. I could keep fiddling with it for the rest of my life, probably. But I think it's good enough to "test-drive".